Search

Objective: An innovative approach by two Queensland health services was taken to establish a shared maternity services' research agenda by partnering with consumers and clinicians. The objective was to set the top five research priorities to ensure that the future direction of maternity research was relevant to end-user and organisational needs. Methods: A modified James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology was applied between August 2022 and February 2023 across two south-east Queensland Health Services which included five participating maternity units and involved partnership with consumers, healthcare professionals and clinician researchers. The reporting guideline for priority setting of health research (REPRISE) was followed. Results: There were 192 respondents to the initial harvesting survey, generating 461 research suggestions. These were aggregated into 122 unique questions and further summarised into a list of 44 research questions. The 157 eligible interim prioritisation survey respondents short-listed 27 questions ready for ranking at a final consensus workshop. The top five question themes were: (1) maternity care experience, engagement and outcomes of priority populations; (2) increasing spontaneous vaginal birth; (3) experiences and perceptions of woman/person-centred care; (4) best practice care during the 'fourth' trimester; and (5) antibiotic use during labour and birth. Conclusion: Applying an adapted JLA framework can successfully shape and establish a research agenda within Australian health services, through partnership with consumers and practicing clinicians. This is a transparent process that strengthens the legitimacy and credibility of research agendas, and it can form a replicable framework for other settings. What is known about the topic? Establishment of research agendas often neglects the participation of research end-users, consumers and practising clinicians, consequently limiting relevance and translation. What does this paper add? Prioritised specific maternity research questions were jointly generated by consumers and front-line clinicians to highlight areas of focus for research funding and support. What are the implications for practitioners? By partnering with consumers and practising clinicians health service research priorities can be established to optimise patient outcomes and ensure future research is both translational and relevant. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Violence and abuse against people with intellectual disabilities are internationally recognised as a pervasive social problem. Recent years have seen the development and implementation of preventative strategies, yet only few of them have been rigorously evaluated. The present paper aims to identify preventative abuse strategies for people with intellectual disabilities and explore the evidence about their quality and effectiveness. A scoping review method was implemented, and a comprehensive search of 14 online databases identified six peer-reviewed articles, published between January 2007 and June 2019, that reported on evaluation of violence prevention strategies designed for adults with intellectual disabilities. Each program and its evaluation were critically and systematically reviewed. Overall, the analysis reveals the strategies' core elements, and highlights strengths and gaps in delivery and evaluation. More rigorous evaluation is required to establish the effectiveness of violence prevention strategies and to advance evidence-based practice in this field. IMPLICATIONS The social work profession has a critical role in the development, implementation, and evaluation of violence prevention strategies for adults with intellectual disabilities. Design of violence prevention strategies needs to be multifaceted, and embedded within the social and cultural environments of people with intellectual disabilities. Violence prevention strategies need to evolve from focusing solely on risk reduction to a broader approach encompassing the safety of adults with intellectual disabilities as part of their human rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Research into nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) has primarily focussed on the experience and regulation of emotion. Recently, NSSI-specific cognitions, including self-efficacy to resist self-injury, have been explored to further understand the behaviour. However, within these studies self-efficacy to resist NSSI has been assessed broadly using an adapted measure of self-efficacy to avoid suicide. There is a need for a NSSI-specific measure of self-efficacy, which considers specific contexts that may influence confidence in the ability to resist self-injuring. This paper reports the development of such a measure. An initial item pool (125 items) was generated from interviews with people with lived experience of NSSI and experts in the field of self-injury. These items were then administered to 650 participants aged 18–40 years (M = 21.14, SD = 2.32, 45.69% with a history of NSSI). Analyses revealed a three-factor structure representing: contexts in which it would be difficult to resist NSSI (risk contexts); contexts which make it easier to resist NSSI (protective contexts); and contexts in which people are reminded of self-injury (reminders of NSSI). To reduce the number of items, eight items with the highest loadings on each factor were retained. The final 24 item (three subscales) scale fit the data well and demonstrated invariance across individuals with and without a history of self-injury. Correlations with related but distinct constructs (e.g., self-esteem, locus of control) supported convergent and discriminative validity. This measure could be used to further theoretical understanding of NSSI and may be useful in clinical settings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]